Category Archives: SMB 3.0

Post navigation

Introduction

When using file shares as backup targets you should leverage Continuous Available SMB 3 file shares. For now, at least. A while back Anton Gostev wrote a very interesting piece in his “The Word from Gostev”. It was about an issue that they saw with people using SMB 3 files shares as backup targets with Veeam Backup & Replication. To some it was a reason to cry wolf. But it’s a probably too little-known issue that can and a such might (will) occur. You need to be aware of it to make good decisions and give good advice.

I’m the business of building rock solid solutions that are highly available to continuous available. This means I’m always looking into the benefits and drawbacks of design choices. By that I mean I study, test and verify them as well. I don’t do “Paper Proof of Concepts”. Those are just border line fraud.

So, what’s going on and what can you do to mitigate the risk or avoid it all together?

Setting the scenario

Your backup software (in our case Veeam Backup & Recovery) running on Windows leverages an SMB 3 file share as a backup target. This could be a Windows Server file share but it doesn’t have to be. It could be a 3rd party appliance or storage array.

The SMB client

The client is the SMB 3 Client Microsoft delivers in the OS (version depends on the OS version). But this client is under control of Microsoft. Let’s face it the source in these scenarios is a Hyper-V host/cluster or a Windows SMB 3 Windows File share, clustered or not.

The SMB server

In regards to the target, i.e. the SMB Server you have a couple of possibilities. Microsoft or 3rd party.

If it’s a third-party SMB 3 implementation on Linux or an appliance. You might not even know what is used under the hood as an OS and 3rd party SMB 3 solution. It could be a storage vendors native SMB 3 implementation on their storage array or simple commodity NAS who bought a 3rd party solution to leverage. It might be high available or in many (most?) cases it is not. It’s hard to know if the 3rd party implements / leverages the full capabilities of the SMB 3 stack as Microsoft does or not. You light not know of there are any bugs in there or not.

You get the picture. If you bank on appliances, find out and test it (trust but verify). But let’s assume its capabilities are on par with what Windows offers and that means the subject being discussed goes for both 3rd party offerings and Windows Server.

When the target is Windows Server we are talking about SMB 3 File Shares that are either Continuous Available or not. For backup targets General Purpose File Shares will do. You could even opt to leverage SOFS (S2D for example). In this case you know what’s implemented in what version and you get bug fixes from MSFT.

When you have continuously available (CA) SMB 3 shares you should be able to sleep sound. SMB 3 has you covered. The risks we are discussing is related to non-CA SMB 3 file shares.

If you are writing to a non-CA SMB 3 share your backup software receives the messages the data has been written. Which actually means that the data is cached in the SMB Clients “queue” of data to write but which might not have been written to the storage yet.

For short interruptions this is survivable and for Office and the like this works well and delivers fast performance. If the connection is interrupted or the share is unavailable the queue keeps the data in memory for a while. So, if the connection restores the data can be written. The SMB 3 Client is smart.

However, this has its limits. The data cache in the queue doesn’t exist eternally. If the connectivity loss or file share availability take too long the data in the SMB 3 client cache is lost. But it was not written to storage! To add a little insult to injury the SBM client send back “we’re good” even when the share has been unreachable for a while.

For backups this isn’t optimal. Actually, the alarm bell should start ringing when it is about backups. Your backup software got a message the data has been written and doesn’t know any better. But is not on the backup target. This means the backup software will run into issues with corrupted backups sooner or later (next backup, restores, synthetic full backups, merges, whatever comes first).

Why did they make it this way?

This is OK default behavior. it works just fine for Office files / most knowledge worker client software that have temp files, auto recovery, and all such lovely capabilities and work is mostly individual and interactive. Those applications are resilient to this by nature. Mind you, all my SMB 3 file share deployments are clustered and highly available where appropriate. By “appropriate” I mean when we don’t have off line caching for those shares as a requirement as those too don’t mix well (https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/filecab/2016/03/15/offline-files-and-continuous-availability-the-monstrous-union-you-should-not-consecrate/). But when you know what your doing it rocks. I can actually failover my file server roles all day long for patching, maintenance & fun when the clients do talk SMB 3. Oh, and it was a joy to move that data to new SANs under the hood. More on that perhaps in another post. But I digress.

You need adequate storage in all uses cases

This is a no brainer. Nothing will save you if the target storage isn’t up to the task. Not the Veeam data move or SMB3 shares with continuous availability. Let’s be very clear about this. Even at the cost-effective side of the equation the storage has to be of sufficient decent quality to prevent data loss. That means decent controllers with battery cached IO as safe guard etc. Whether that’s a SAN or a “simple” raid controller or pass through HBA’s for storage spaces, doesn’t matter. You have to have it. Putting your data on SATA drives without any save guard is sure way of risking data loss. That’s as simple as it gets. You don’t do that, unless you don’t care. And if you care, you would not be reading this!

Can this be fixed?

Well as a non-SMB 3 developer I would say we need an option added that the SMB 3 client can be configured to not report success until that data has been effectively written on the target, or at least has landed somewhere on quality, cache protected storage.

This option does not exist today. I do not work for Microsoft but I know some people there and I’m pretty sure they want to fix it. I’m just not sure how big of a priority it is at the moment. For me it’s important that when a backup application goes to a non-continuous available file share it can request that it will not cache and the SMB Server says “OK” got it, I will behave accordingly. Now the details in the implementation will be different but you get the message?

I would like to make the case that it should be a configurable option. It is not needed for all scenarios and it might (will) have an impact on performance. How big that would be I have no clue. I’m just a blogger who does IT as a job. I’m not a principal PM at Microsoft or so.

It’s also important not to panic. Most of you might even never has heard or experienced this. But depending on the use case and the quality of the network and processes you might. In a backup scenario this is not something that makes for a happy day.

The cry wolf crowd

I’ll be blunt. WARNING. Take a hike if you have a smug “Windoze sucks” attitude. If you want to deal dope you shouldn’t be smoking too much of your own stuff, but primarily know it inside out. NFS in all its varied implementations has potential issues as well. So, I’d also do my due diligence with any solution you recommend. Trust but verify, remember?! Actually, an example of one such an issue was given for an appliance with NFS by Veeam. Guess what, every one has issues. Choose your poison, drink it and let other chose theirs. Condescending remarks just make you look bad every time. And guess what that impression tends to last. Now on the positive side, I hear that caching can be disabled on modern NFS client implementations. So, the potential issue is known and is is being addressed there as well.

Conclusion

Don’t panic. I just discussed a potential issue than can occur and that you should be aware off when deciding on a backup target. If you have rock solid networking and great server management processes you can go far without issues, but that’s not 100 % fail proof. As I’m in the business of building the best possible solutions it’s something you need to be aware off.

But know that they can occur, when and why so you can manage the risk optimally. Making Windows Server SMB 3 file shares Continuously Available will protect against this effectively. It does require failover clustering. But at least now you know why I say that when using file shares as backup targets you should leverage continuous available SMB 3 file shares

When you buy appliances or 3rd party SMB 3 solutions, this issue also exists but be extra diligent even with highly available shares. Make sure it works as it should!

I hope Microsoft resolves this issue as soon as possible. I’m sure they want to. They want their products to be the best and fix any possible concerns you might have.

Introduction

As 25Gbps (SPF28) is on route to displace 10Gbps (SFP+) from its leading role as the work horse in the datacenter. That means that 10Gbps is slowly but surely becoming “the LOM option”. So it will be passing on to the role and place 1Gbps has held for many years. What extension slots are concerned we see 25Gbps cards rise tremendously in popularity. The same is happening on the switches where 25-100Gbps ports are readily available. As this transition takes place and we start working on acquiring 25Gbps or faster gear the question about SPF+ and SFP28 compatibility arises for anyone who’s involved in planning this.

Who needs 25Gbps?

When I got really deep into 10Gbps about 7 years ago I was considered a bit crazy and accused of over delivering. That was until they saw the speed of a live migration. From Windows Server 2012 and later versions that was driven home even more with shared nothing and storage live migration and SMB 3 Multichannel SMB Direct.

On top of that storage spaces and SOFS came onto the storage scene in the Microsoft Windows server ecosystem. This lead us to S2D and storage replica in Windows Server 2016 and later. This meant that the need for more bandwidth, higher throughput and low latency was ever more obvious and clear. Microsoft has a rather extensive collection of features & capabilities that leverage SMB 3 and as such can leverage RDMA.

In this time frame we also saw the strong rise of All Flash Array solutions with SSD and NVMe. Today we even see storage class memory come into the picture. All this means even bigger needs for high throughput at low latency, so the trend for ever faster Ethernet is not over yet.

What does this mean?

That means that 10Gbps is slowly but surely becoming the LOM option and is passing on to the role 1Gbps has held for many years. In our extension slots we see 25-100Gbps cards rise in popularity. The same is happening on the switches where we see 25, 50, 100Gbps or even higher. I’m not sure if 50Gbps is ever going to be as popular but 25Gbps is for sure. In any case I am not crazy but I do know how to avoid tech debt and get as much long term use out of hardware as possible.

When it comes to the optic components SFP+ is commonly used for 10Gbps. This provides a path to 40Gbps and 100Gbps via QSFP. For 25Gbps we have SFP28 (1 channel or lane for 25Gbps). This give us a path to 50Gbps (2*2*25Gbps – two lanes) and to 100Gbps (4*25Gbps – 4 lanes) via QSFP28. In the end this a lot more economical. But let’s look at SPF+ and SFP28 compatibility now.

SPF+ and SFP28 compatibility

When it comes to SPF+ and SFP28 compatibility we’re golden. SFP+ and SPF28 share the same form factor & are “compatible”. The moment I learned that SFP28 share the same form factor with SFP+ I was hopeful that they would only differ in speed. And indeed, that hope became a sigh of relief when I read and experimentally demonstrated to myself the following things I had read:

I can plug in a SFP28 module into an SPF+ port

I can plug in a SFP+ module into an SPF28 port

Connectivity is established at the lowest common denominator, which is 10Gbps

The connectivity is functional but you don’t gain the benefits SFP28 bring to the table.

Compatibility for migrations & future proofing

For a migration path that is phased over time this is great news as you don’t need to have everything in place right away from day one. I can order 25Gbps NIC in my servers now, knowing that they will work with my existing 10Gbps network. They’ll be ready to roll when I get my switches replaced 6 months or a year later. Older servers with 10Gbps SPF+ that are still in production when the new network gear arrives can keep working on new SPF28 network gear.

SPF+: 10Gbps

SFP28: 25Gbps but it can go up to 28 so the name is SFP28, not 25. Note that SFP28 can handle 25Gbps, 10Gbps and even 1Gbps.

QSPF28: 100Gbps to 4*25Gbps or 2*50Gbps gives you flexibility and port density.

25Gbps / SPF28 is the new workhorse to deliver more bandwidth, better error control, less crosstalk and an economical sound upgrade path.

Do note that SPF+ modules will work in SPF28 ports and vice versa but you have to be a bit careful:

Fix the ports speed when you’re not running at the default speed

On SPF28 modules you might need to disable options such as forward error correction.

Make sure a 10Gbps switch is OK with a 25Gbps cables, it might not.

If you have all your gear from a vendor specializing in RDMA technology like Mellanox this detects this all this and takes care of everything for you. Between vendors and 3rd party cables pay extra attention to verifying all will be well.

SPF+ and SFP28 compatibility is also important for future proofing upgrade paths. When you buy and introduce new network gear it is nice to know what will work with what you already have and what will work with what you might or will have in the future. Some people will get all new network switches in at once while others might have to wait for a while before new servers with SPF28 arrive. Older servers might be around and will not force you to keep older switches around just for them.

SPF28 / QSFP28 provides flexibility

Compatibility is also important for purchase decision as you don’t need to match 25Gbps NIC ports to 25Gbps switch ports. You can use the QFSP28 cables and split them to 4 * 25Gbps SFP28.

This means you can have switch port density and future proofing if you so desire. Some vendors offer modular switches where you can mix port types (Dell EMC Networking S6100-ON)

Conclusion

More bandwidth at less cost is a no brainer. It also makes your bean counters happy as this is achieved with less switches and cables. That also translates to less space in a datacenter, less consumption of power and less cooling. And the less material you have the less it cost in operational costs (management and maintenance). This is only offset partially by our ever-growing need for more bandwidth. As converged networking matures and becomes better that also helps with the cost. Even where economies of scale don’t matter that much. The transition to 25Gbps and higher is facilitated by SPF+ and SFP28 compatibility and that is good news for all involved.

I’m travelling to New Orleans for VeeamON2. If you don’t know what that is, please check it out here. I can recommend this conference. Both the attendees and presenters are all very active users of Veeam products and the workloads Veeam protects in real live. That makes for excellent sharing of experiences, insights and knowledge with your peers.

Choosing a storage solution for your backups can be a daunting task: Windows or Linux servers, SMB shares, SAN, NAS, deduplication appliances … But block cloning, a new feature in Windows 2016 and leveraged by Veeam Backup & Replication™, is promising to change this. Available for ReFS 3.1 file systems, this technology allows for insanely reduced transform times and spaceless GFS backups. Or at least, this is what marketing has told us so far, but how good is it in reality? Is an expensive and complex Storage Spaces Direct the only way to consume all the amazing new features? How can I design my new backup repository with these new options in mind? What about encryption and Veeam Scale-out Backup Repository™? Didier Van Hoye, Carsten Rachfahl (both Microsoft MVPs and Veeam Vanguards) and Luca Dell’Oca (Veeam cloud architect) have joined forces to bring you from-the-field information, tips, tricks and ideas to build your next Veeam backup repository with real-life tests and feedback gained from deploying this new powerful combination into multiple environments.

This session is complimentary to the other ones given at VeeamON 2017, both the breakout sessions as well as some of the session the Microsoft MVPs are presenting at the boot. Those sessions combined will send you home with ideas and options on how to leverage Veeam in creative ways to achieve the best possible solution for your needs. Personally I’ll be discussing some of the options you have to get get high available backup targets leveraging ReFSv3.1 in brown field scenarios when a brand new Storage Spaces Direct deployment is not option or when you don’t run Windows Server Windows Server 2016 yet.

Next to that and between attending interesting sessions I’ll be available at the Veeam and Microsoft boots if you want to have questions or want to discuss the technologies. At the Microsoft boot I’ll be presenting a demo focused walk through on how to on Discrete Device Assignment in Windows Server 2016.

We have also seen earlier that Veeam B & R 9.5 leverages ReFSv3 in Windows Server 2016. This provides clear and present benefits in regards to space efficiencies and speed with many backup file related operations. Read Veeam Leads the way by leveraging ReFSv3 capabilities

When it comes to ReFSv3 in Windows Server 2016 most of the focus has gone to solutions based around Storage Spaces Direct (S2D). That’s a great solution and it is the poster child use case of these technologies.

But what other options do you have out there to build efficient and effective high available backup targets creatively except for S2D? What if you would like to repurpose existing hardware to build those? Let’s take a look together at how continuous available general purpose file shares & ReFSv3v3 provide high available backup targets

CSV, S2D, ReFSv3 & Archival Data

In Windows Server 2016, traditional shared storage (iSCSI, FC, Shared SAS, Shared RAID) with CSV are not recommend to be used with ReFSv3. Why isn’t exactly clear. The biggest impact you’ll see is the performance difference when not writing to the owner node of the CSV in this use case. Even with a well configured RDMA network that difference is significant. But that doesn’t mean that the performance is bad. It’s just that many of the super-fast meta data operations are relatively and significantly slower when compared each other, not that any of these two are slow.

Microsoft does state that an S2D with ReFSv3 and SOFS shares can be used for archival data. Storage spaces and ReFSv3 also have the benefit of offering automatic repair of corrupt data from a redundant copy on the fly even when needed. So yes, the best know supported scenario is this one.

Continuous available general purpose file shares and ReFSv3 provide high available backup targets

But what if we need a high available backup target and would love to leverage ReFSv3 with Veeam Backup & Replication 9.5? Well, you can have 95% of your cookie and eat it to. All this without ignoring the cautions offered.

We could set up SOFS shares on a Windows Server 2016 Cluster with ReFSv3 with traditional shared storage. Some storage vendors do state this is supported actually.

That only means you don’t have the auto repair functionality ReFSv3 combined with storage spaces offers. But perhaps you want to avoid the risk of using ReFSv3 with CSV in a non S2D scenario all together. What you could do is forgo ReFSv3 and use NTFS. How well this will work for archival data or backup is something you’ll need to test and find out how well this holds up. There is not much info is out there, only other cautions and warnings that might keep you up at night.

There is another scenario however and that is using Windows Server 2016 failover clustering to set up continuously available general purpose file shares that leverage SMB3 transparent failover.

The good news is that general purpose file shares (no CSV) do work consistently with ReFSv3 because such a share/LUN is only exposed on one cluster node at the time, the owner. By having multiple shares and setting preferred owners we can load balance the workload across all cluster nodes.

Thank to continuous availability for general file shares and SMB 3 transparent failover we can still get a high available backup target this way. The failover is fast enough to make this happen and all we see with Veeam Backup & Replication is a short pause in throughput before it resumes after failover. To put the icing on the cake, you can leverage SMB multichannel SMB Direct for both backup and restores.

I would take a sizeable whitepaper to walk through the setup so instead I’ll show you a a quick video of a POC we did in the lab here https://vimeo.com/212886392.

If you want to learn more come to the community & other conferences I’m speaking at and will be around for Ask The Experts time opportunities. I’ll be at the German Hyper-V community meet up, The Cloud & Datacenter Conference in Germany 2017, Dell EMC World 2017 and last but not least VeeamON 2017 (see May 2017 will be a travelling month).

Conclusion

What do you lose?

Potentially there is one big loss in regards to the capabilities of ReFSv3 with this solution when you are not using storage spaces. This is that you lose the capability to automatic repair of corrupt data. The ability of ReFSv3 to do so is tied into the redundant copies of Storage Spaces (parity/mirror).

What do you get?

That’s fine, the strength of this design is that you get the speed and space efficiencies of ReFSv3and high available backup targets in way more scenarios than “just” S2D. After all, not everyone is in a position to choose their storage fabric for backup targets green field or at will. But they might be able to leverage existing storage and opt to use SMB 3 for their data transport.

So even if you can’t have it all, you can still build very good solutions. It offers ReFSv3 benefits and high availability for your backup target via transparent failover with SMB transparent failover on continuous available general purpose file shares. This also only requires Windows Server 2016 Standard Edition, which is a cost saving. You get to leverage SMB Multichannel and SMB Direct. All this while not ignoring the cautions of using ReFSv3 in certain scenarios.

On top of that, if you use NTFS with this approach it will also work for Windows Server 2012 (R2) as the OS for the backup target cluster hosts.

Disclaimer

I do not work for or at Microsoft, nor am I perfect or infallible just because I’m an MVP. You’ll have to do your own testing and validation. From our testing and without ReFSv3 bugs ruining the show, to me this is a very valid and cost effective approach.